Google sets burial date for legacy Chrome Extensions, fears for ad-blockers grow

Post by bashinator » Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 7:16 PM UTC

Stephen304 wrote: post #272

XorNot wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Behavior-based blocks take care of those largely. I think only Facebook is reliably staying ahead?

If you mean ublock origin cosmetic filters, yeah facebook is really putting up a fight. The status quo has been randomized css classes, identical html structure, interspersing hidden junk characters in between the "Sponsored" text, and the latest I've noticed, anchors that link to # until you hover over, preventing blocking href=^/ads. That and turning on or off or changing behavior between users and regions makes co…

Post by godshatter » Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 7:36 PM UTC

effingwewt wrote: post #342

rejectfinite wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>intuitive and useful features ??? Vivaldi is the king of features. Too bad it is so slow. Firefox has extensions for all you need. Vertical tabs, tab groups etc

Firefox used to have all the extensions I need. There were thousands before and what, a handful now? Firefox jumped the shark years ago, and I loved it from day 1. I use FF/brave but no browsers make me happy any longer. I'd pay good money to have FF back before the bean counters killed it. Now I just see FF as something google pays to make sure barely works so they can point and say there are other browsers.

Post by captaincaveman » Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 7:43 PM UTC

Symbiote wrote: post #101

captaincaveman wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was put off by Firefox by some questionable opinionated decisions they made. I don't want a browser with a political agenda, just want one that that follows the specs and performs well.

Isn't Chrome making opinionated decisions (like this one), pushing a political agenda (anti-privacy, pro-corporatism, pro-monopoly etc) and abusing the standardisation process?

Post by ghostwords » Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

smaddock wrote: post #344

ghostwords wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Ideally, I'd like to see MV3 continue supporting the persistent context use case as well as maintaining webRequest blocking support. Same, which is why I engage with browser representatives in the W3C WebExtensions Community Group. Unfortunately, the status quo is grim with Firefox seemingly uninterested in standing up to Chrome and citing compatibility as the main reason for following Chrome into mandatory Service…

I appreciate that yourself and other folks are engaging in the community to request improvements. Prior to the group being formed, most discussion regarding MV3 occurred on the Chrome Extensions Google Group [0]. While feedback was accepted and open there, I hadn't seen the Chrome team acting on it to make changes. That's where most of my pessimism on the situation comes from. I believe the Chrome team's main motivat…

Post by droppedTheBox » Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 7:48 PM UTC

Ginden wrote: post #345

droppedTheBox wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO the Web was better in the Trident days, when IE6's dominance allowed a single defacto web-wide standard (vs today's WHATWG clusterfsk) but alternative browsers like NetCaptor could still provide all the shiny UI chrome, from tabs to integrated popup blocking. Having a single renderer but multiple browsers on top of it would vastly simplify the web for users & developers, resulting in one consistent engine to deve…

> Having multiple renderers is just a waste of everyone's time... Unfortunately, Blink isn't openly governed. It's governed by Google, and if Google decides that they won't implement complex feature, maintaining that feature will be logistical nightmare. Imagine writing drivers for some exotic kernel, but kernel API or even very architecture isn't stable.